Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 4026 1996 SLD 4026 , 1996 PLD 48
Quetta High Court
First Appeal from Order No. 92 of 1995, decided on 20th May, 1996.
Presented By: Before Munawar Ahmad Mirza, C J
M. Zafar and Khushnood Ahmed for Appellant. Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar for
Respondents.

SAEED MUHAMMAD --- Appellant

VERSUS

MEHRULLAH and another --- Respondents

Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959.

Section: 13 , 15 , 2

West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--- ---- Ss. 13 & 15 --- Ejectment of tenant --- Payment by tenant styled as "Pugree"--Effect --- Relations between landlord and tenant were regulated by West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 --- Where, however, terms of contract contravene provision of law (payment of Pugree) same must give way being void and inoperative---Payment of "Pugree" thus, would neither create tenancy in perpetuity nor has the force of law --- Payment of "Pugree" being mutual arrangement between the parties, would not debar landlord from instituting eviction proceedings on ground of bona fide personal need. Sheikh Muhammad Yousuf v. District Judge, Rawalpindi 1987 SCMR 307 and Messrs.M. Qassim v. Sharbat Khan 1992 MLD 1225 rel. 1986 CLC 1493; 1993 SCMR 200; 1992 MLD 1225; Muhammad Latif v. Hakirn Nisar Ahmed and others 1986 SCMR 650; Sardar Khan v. Riaz Ahmad and others 1986 SCMR 1981 and Haroon Kassain and others v. Azam Suleman Madha PLD 1990 SC 394 ref. West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--- ---- Ss. 2, 13 & 15 --- Ejectment of tenant --- Effect of extra-payment of amount by tenant --- Jurisdiction of Rent Controller --- Relationship of landlord and tenant having been admitted mere fact of extra-payment of amount by tenant or providing certain facility to either side while leasing out premises would not affect statutory jurisdiction of Rent Controller. M.K. Muhammad v. Muhammad Abu Bakar 1993 SCMR 200 and Dilber v. Mehmood Hussain PLD 1986 Quetta 198 ref. West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--- ---- Ss. 13 & 15 --- Bona fide personal requirement of landlord --- Proof-- Landlords produced sufficiently convincing evidence to establish their claim and genuine need of   one of the landlords to commence his business in shop in question --- Rebuttal of such evidence mainly related to payment of "Pugree" to previous owner and. availability of other vacant shops with landlords --- Landlord, however, had exclusive choice regarding suitability of building owned by them for carrying on business Or bringing the same to…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register